of the choices they needed in their health care system. i go back to it over and over again. they need some reinforcements. if we have -- if we have four, five new members of the united states senate who are pro-choice democratic women, these policies are only going to get better for our women and for our families in this country. >> floyd, independent line, atwater, california. good morning. >> caller: form. i'm a mother and a grandmother and proudly represented by barbara boxer. i'm so pleased that she has gone before congress and expressed what has been going on. very quickly, i want to comment that i believe rush limbaugh will go the way of howard stern. but aside from that, i was working in obgyn for 20 years. and i want you to know that the birth control pill is used for so many other things regarding women's health. it is used to regulate menstrual

periods. it's used for help with hormone stabilization. it's used to shrink some tumors. it's used for so many other things. and i think it's funny that these gentlemen that are -- i use the term loosely -- but they think you can just take a birth control pill one day and suddenly you're not able to have children. the viagra pill. also, when a woman is on the pill, imagine a woman who is on welfare. imagine a woman, my daughter for a time had to seek the public assistance, and she did not want to have children while on public assistance. so she turned to the birth control pill to prevent unwanted pregnancies because she could not afford to have them. i just wanted to say thank you very, very much for your assistance with this issue. >> absolutely. i couldn't agree with you more. you think about the debates that are happening in the house and

the senate, and you think -- you really do start thinking boy, these conversations are going to be really, really different when there are more women in these debates. as i said, the u.s. congress is only 17% women now, one in six members of the congress are women. and what is missing from so many of these conversations is exactly the story, the personal story you just shared of being an obgyn, and what it means for women to have access to a full range of health care, that it isn't just about birth control, but there are so many other health reasons for women to have access to the birth control pill and so many other things. it is about health care. it's about the economy. it's about what women need to do to protect their families and to have families. and i do -- i'm with you. sometimes i wonder where these conversations are going. a and you just know, you know that when there is an equal number of women and men at the

table, and good strong pro-choice democratic women sharing their personal stories, this debate, this conversation is going to look really, really different in the future. >> the hill reported last month that emily's list was putting out what they called an advertising blitz attacking republicans for not including women witnesses at the congressional hearing that happened a couple of weeks back. has this actually been good for your organization, this dialogue? you've been on the airwaves. you've gotten attention for it. has it helped you? >> well, what this whole debate that republicans have ignited has done is awakened women and men who care about women, which i think there are lots of them out there, to get engaged politically. we have seen record growth in the last year. so absolutely. but what is most important that women and men are stepping up and saying this debate should not be happening. it happened 50 years ago. it happened 30 years ago. we have -- we need to focus on

what is important for our families. and why emily's list went up with the advertisement to show that, yes, there are some really, really wonderful women in the house and the senate, yet in 2012, we actually saw a house hearing to discuss contraception with a panel of only men. where are our women's voices? where are they? it is up for all of us across the country to stand up and say we need an equal number of women and men at the table here. and to do that, we have to elect more -- for us more pro-choice democratic women. and in 2012, we have a great opportunity to make significant gains in the house, in the senate with strong women candidates from coast-to-coast. i think about the number of women running for the house from

val demings, who is looking to run in orlando, to annie custer in new hampshire. these are women who are going to bring strong points of view and experiences that just aren't there right now. and that's what we need to do to change congress to get us back on track to a debate that is about the future of our country, the future of our children, instead of the debate we're having right now, which to me, and i think to americans across the country looks like a debate that we had in the '50s. and there is no place for that. it's 2012. it's time for us to look forward. >> john joins from albuquerque, new mexico. democratic caller. john, you're on with emily's list president stephanie schriock. go ahead. >> caller: hey, good morning. i'm enjoying the show and i wanted to just chime in because it seems the fundamental dishonest with the republicans. i've been saying it for years. it does no good to the past. but it seems like every election cycle, i've got an fcc complaint

letter against rush limbaugh. just to go back to the last, he insulted the president's mother, insulted every black person in this country and the world for that matter with his racist parodies that he refused to stop playing. our local jerk fair at the citadel broadcasting corporation played the racist parodies. they got an fcc complaint letter typed by me at the office. >> john, let me throw a question to you. some of our tweeters are weighing in and talking about bill maher, comedian on hbo, and how he made offensive comments severing to sarah palin. he called her derogatory names. do you feel that's the same thing as what rush limbaugh did? >> no, i don't. she -- i mean you can't help but if you're born black or you're born a woman. but the fundamental dishonest of the republican party shows every time i'm going to facebook right now to put the credo petition to have rush limbaugh removed from

the by the fcc, removed from the airwaves. on c-span facebook for the listeners to partake in that if they want. but i'm of the opinion that their political appointees at the fcc. rush has so much money, he can keep the thing in court for two, three election cycles, regardless of first amendment. >> john, let's have a question for stephanie? . you can address what he said. bill maher, calling governor palin, a derogatory word used for women. that similar, and should president obama as our tweeter asks return his campaign contributions because of that? >> there is -- again, there is no place for this kind of dialogue. but i would argue that in the case of rush limbaugh, he has gone so far here. an he has done really very, very little to get himself out of it. i was so insulted by the first

round of statements. i was shocked that he inessence doubled down the next day, thinking this was a good idea. and then he instead of having a full-throated apology, threw something up on his blog over the weekend. this is on our american airwaves. this is not on a cable show. this is on our american airwaves. and it's enough. he has been doing this for years, and now he is insulting 51% of the population -- our daughters, our mothers, our grandmothers. it's unacceptable. it's just unacceptable. and i certainly hope, as the caller hopes as well, that he is done. and i think the best way to do that is for all of us to join together to say it needs to end. >> would you make that same call to bill maher as the tweeter points out? >> everybody's got to focus on their pieces, but right now i've just got to say that rush limbaugh just continues and

continues on the american airwaves on our radio stations across the country. and we've got to pull back and walk away from that, absolutely. >> so different -- hbo is different, since you said public airwaves versus cable? >> well, i think there has been a long, long history of what rush limbaugh has been doing as was pointed out. we feel like we keep having the same conversation about rush limbaugh. and i think he has just gone so much further in this -- on this one. it's just been outrageous. >> let's hear from david, republican in detroit. good morning, david. >> caller: good morning. how are you? >> good, thanks. go ahead. >> caller: my comment is pretty much about the hypocrisy i'm hearing from your guest on the show. speaking of bill maher, the word he used and the term he used against sarah palin is absolutely disgusting, and he pretty much doubled down on it this weekend by saying the only differences he doesn't have sponsors. >> okay. you don't have to tell us the

word said. why is that a concern to you, david? >> caller: i'm not going to say the word. he doubled down pretty much because he doesn't have sponsors. my question to your guest, ed schultz, last year in may pretty much said the same thing about laura ingraham. and there was no outrage from women there was no outrage from the left. is it okay to just bash conservative women, to say things like that about people like palin? sorry. >> let's ask our question. >> let me just be clear. there is no place in the discourse for any of this. there really isn't. and there should be demands for apologies, and everybody should be held responsible. in fact, ed schultz not only was held responsible and taken off the air for a bit, he also had a full-throated apology. so i think there are -- we all need to hold these folks

responsible. we absolutely do there is no place for this. and i'll tell you, you just listed off all of these folks. i hate to say this. is this just another example of why we need more women involved in all of this? i've got to tell you, it's a lot more difficult to make those kind of statements if you're sitting at a table with a woman across from you. and i think the entire dialogue right now says to me as woman and across the country, and to a lot of men who care about this too, that we really do need to work to change this political dialogue. i think one of the best ways to change it is to involve more women in the process. and the first place to do that is by electing more women, electing more women to the house of representatives, to the united states senate, to legislatures around the country so we can get off of these topics and to focus on what we need to be doing for the future of our country to ensure that we have a strong economy.

and i really do believe at emily's list, as we work with this historic number of women running this cycle that we have an opportunity to make great change come november. >> amanda is in iranton, ohio, independent. are you involved in super tuesday? >> caller: oh, yes. >> are you going to go out and vote? >> caller: ron paul, ron paul. with all a due respect you are being very disingenuous. i am completely stunned at the hypocrisy, number one. rush limbaugh is an american citizen the same as you and i, and your rights seem to trump mine. i have a right to practice my religion. it is the first amendment, right? and you keep referring to this as america. the last time i checked, the supreme court said that the nazis have a right to say what they want to.

but republicans don't? and republican women don't have a seat at emily's table or anyone's table? look what you have done to any conservative woman. >> well, we focus specifically at emily's list on electing democratic women. and what we've been doing for 27 years. when emily's list started, no democratic woman had won a seat in the united states senate in her own right ever in the history of the country. that was only 27 years ago. as i said earlier, i think across the board, though we need more women to run. we need more republican women to run. i call on all women to find a way to run for office today, because i really do believe that when there is more women at the table, we are going to end up in a much, much better dialogue. i absolutely think that's the case. now does emily's list often

disagree with our republican women counterparts on policy issues? yes, we do. but i do believe, i really do believe that more women across the board involved in politics is going to help the country. and i'm concerned that the republican party right now has moved so far out of the mainstream that a lot of good, strong republican women who used to be really involved don't have a home right now. and i look at what just happened in maine with olympia snowe retiring. and now olympia snowe is not one that we would be endorsing because she is a republican, but i really do think that as an american woman, it is really a big loss for this country to have olympia snowe retire. her voice as a moderate republican woman was incredibly important, and i think we need to find some more olympia snowes. i really do.

>> binghamton, new york, chuck, democrat. go ahead. >> caller: hello. i just wanted to mention, stephanie, that it's been really upsetting to me. talk about a man's world, that alcohol and beer has been raised to 5.9 unless otherwise stated, and 7.9 -- >> chuck, what does it have to do with the topic at hand this morning? >> caller: well, domestic violence against women. and i hope that you also support medical cannabis and that women drank during the time of the menstrual cycle and beyond. >> chuck has brung up this issue of how other examples in his opinion alcohol content and beer and other alcoholic benches can contribute to problems. anything you guys are involved with at all? >> not specifically. i can't really address the points of that question. but i do believe, you know, again that as we work to elect more pro-choice democratic

women, you end up with a variety of views that we are missing right now. and i think that the debates and dialogues and discussion points are going to be brought up in a much different way when we change those numbers. >> asheville, north carolina. theta, republican. good morning. >> caller: good morning. thanks for taking my call. and i just had some comments. i will agree with this lady on one point. we do need some more women, and we need some conservative women in congress. we don't need any more women like the pelosis and the boxers and people like that. we need some conservative women. >> theta, have you thought about running for office? >> caller: i would really like to. since i retired, i watch c-span all the time. and i know what is going on in this country. and i watched the debate, the hearing that issa had with the panels. and the democrats have been so

deceptive. i heard ms. boxer get on the floor and say that there were no women on the panel. she even showed a picture. they had two panels. there were no women on the first panel. the second panel there were two women. >> let's throw this question to stephanie schriock. >> the major panel had no women on it. and you saw the picture. and they're talking about women's health care. i just go back to i just don't think that happens -- that wouldn't happen if there were more conservative women on that committee. it definitely wouldn't happen if there are just more women in the house of representatives today. and i hope you consider running. i think we do need more women to step up and run for office across the country. emily's list is focused on electing pro-choice democratic women, and we've had -- you know, we've had good success. i'm hoping for better success coming into 2012. we are seeing on the democratic side a historic number of women candidates stepping up to run across the country.

and those women from shelley berkeley, who is running for the united states senate in nevada, someone who has served her house district very well in the las vegas area, stepping up to say it's time to change the dynamics of the united states senate. i think that is precisely what we need to be doing. >> one last tweet. dr. jojo writes it should be about electing the best candidate whether it's male or female. that's his or her opinion. and one final article. a new report by map light claims emily's list owns certain states. this is a story i'm looking at from the san jose business journal. the report was entitled "who owns your member of congress." it's looking at how much money emily's list pours into races. tell us about the relationship when you donate and contribute to a campaign, do you expect something in return? how does that dialogue take place? >> the thing about emily's list, and for 27 years this has been the case, we just want to elect

more pro-choice democratic women. that is our job. we do not lobby. we do not -- we're not an advocacy organization. we are about campaigns and elections. we help recruit, train women candidates. we help build the staffs around those campaigns. we help advise and counsel as the campaigns go through the election. we ask our membership of over a million to help fund those campaigns. and on election night, we will sit there, win or lose, holding her hand in celebration or not. and then we look at the next cycle and keep on moving. because until these numbers change from 17% to ultimately 51%, we have our work cut out for us. and that is precisely what we focus on, and nothing else. >> stephanie schriock, president of emily's list, thank you for

coming in this morning. great. thank you so much for having me. i'm thrilled. on washington journal tomorrow morning, the president of the business round table john engler looks top ceos. "huffington post" reporter tom zeller looks at america's poor and middle class. and andrew weiss will discuss how the election of russian president vladimir putin will affect relations between the u.s. and russia. "washington journal" is live on c-span every day at 7:00 a.m. eastern. tomorrow, our live coverage of the american israel public affairs committee's annual conference continues. speakers include presidential candidates rick santorum, mitt romney and newt gingrich. live coverage starting at 8:35 a.m. eastern here on c-span3. watch super tuesday election results tomorrow night on the c-span networks. and while you watch, use our

second screen web page with your tablet or laptop computer to see result maps, social media posts from candidates and reporters and a public forum for your tweets and those of other viewers. you can also monitor our "mentioned on c-span" blog, where we'll be posting super tuesday programming information and news stories. use a laptop or tablet to expand your c-span viewing on our brand-new web page, made especially for our super tuesday coverage. c-span.org/screen2. coming up here on c-span3, a look at human rights in china. then, legal scholars argue the constitutionality of president obama's recess appointments. later, a discussion on the republican presidential candidates' plans to reduce the federal deficit. the wife of imprisoned chinese human rights attorney gao zhisheng testified on capitol hill about china's human

rights abuses. the congressional-executive china commission held a commission to examine the imprisonment of the attorney and the dangers many chinese face from the government. this hearing is an hour and 40 minutes. >> the commission will come to order, and i want to welcome all of our distinguished panelists and guests and thank you for being here. ladies and gentlemen, as president obama welcomes vice president gao zhisheng, chinese leader in waiting to the white house today, our commission will hear testimony from two wives who are appealing for the immediate release of their jailed husbands, great human rights leaders back in china. we'll also hear from two human rights experts as well, who will give great insight and detail as to the issues before us. as chairman, i hope that president obama doesn't put human rights last on the agenda or not at all as he did when

president hu jintao visited the white house on january 19th of 2011. one of the wives, li jing says that, and i quote, "only the united states can make this case to china." that is, the case of her husband and the case of the disappeared and incarcerated human rights leaders. please, president obama, listen to these courageous women, geng ho and li jing, and act decisively. the commission hopes that the human rights issues in china will be raised in a serious way during the vice president's visit and, particularly, that the detention of gao zhisheng, len xibao, pastor lang rong li and others are raised often and discussed in detail. this important and timely hearing recognizes one of china's most important human

rights leaders and lawyers, gao zhisheng. in early 2000, mr. gao, a self-trained lawyer, emerged as a champion of human rights causes and a defender of marginalized groups in china. today, we know little about mr. gao's current condition or his whereabouts. then, the issue of an academic and professor who published an open letter to president hu, calling for multiparty elections, posted a charter for a new democracy party online and called for the end of china's notorious re-education through labor system. for that, he was sentenced to ten years in prison. gao zhisheng's brilliant legal advocacy on behalf of marginalized groups in china, including practitioners and others, christians, world workers, human rights activists and more, resulted in being sentenced on trumped-up inciting subversion charges in 2006.

he was sentenced to three years imprisonment but granted a five-year suspended sentence for a period of parole. during this time, however, mr. gao was subjected to years of brutal torture, and he repeatedly "disappeared." an outspoken christian, mr. gao has been disappeared into official custody since february of 2009 with only a brief reappearance under official supervision in march and april of 2010. information on mr. gao's enforced disappearance and current condition remains a closely guarded secret. for months and years, we heard nothing of mr. gao's ongoing detention or torture. two months ago, however, chinese officials announced that mr. gao would be forced to serve out his original three-year criminal sentence a week before he should have finished his five-year parole period. the announcement claimed that mr. gao violated the conditions of his parole. of course, no details were

provided. one can only wonder what violations mr. gao committed, since he has been held incommunicado during the majority of his parole period and has been, as i said, brutally tortured by the chinese government throughout. in the past month, his brother and other family members have been turned away in their attempts to visit mr. gao. we have received no word on his health or condition. an expert witness will demonstrate the official case against gao zhisheng as not only ripe with villainy, but also beleft of any semblance of humanity. an account of mr. gao's torture made public by the "associated press" in january of 2011, mr. gao disclosed to that reporter the excruciating details of his detention. "the police stripped gao zhisheng bare and pummeled him with handguns and holsters. for two days and nights, they took turns beating him and did things he refused to describe."

he recalled "for 48 hours, my life hung by a thread." authorities reportedly threatened to dump his body in a river and taunted him by saying "you must forget you're human." to the vice president of china, we will not forget. we do not know if mr. gao is alive or dead. in solidarity, mr. gao and his family and his lovely wife, who is here today, we know that we will honor mr. gao's accomplishments, his rights advocacy and his brave, brave witness for the truth. we will not let those who hold gao zhisheng to destroy his legacy. we will not allow these criminals to dispose of his significance. we will not forget him, not now and not ever, and we will continue to press for his release. we are also honored to hear from two specialists with unique insights, including jared genser, founder of freedom now and part of zhisheng's pro bono

legal team. mr. genser will discuss the recently filed petition with the u.n. working group with arbitrary detention on behalf of mr. gao, seeking a decision on whether his imprisonment violates international law. we will hear from bob fu, pastor fu who also spent time while in china, will discuss the free gao campaign and the need to hold china accountable for its ongoing harassment. the case of kwo kwun, a former criminal court officer and former university associate professor, illustrates how chinese officials target citizens who attempt to form independent political parties or use the internet to organize or to pose online opinions deemed too politically sensitive. in 2007, mr. kwon began posting a series of open letters to top government leaders, advocating on behalf of laid-off workers,

demilitarized military contracts and displaced farmers and also wrote letters calling for a multiparty rule and government reforms. because his writings were considered two critical by the government, he lost his university professorship and was further demoted from a communist democratically state-approved party and then formed his own party. and for that, he has gotten -- and these other things -- he has gotten a ten-year prison sentence. the hearing today continues the congressional-executive commission's work to monitor china human rights and developments and to give voice to the persecuted. in the past year, the commission has consistently raised china's violations of international law and human rights standards in its reports and events. recent hearings have been able to boldly shine a light on some of china's gravest human rights abuses and injustices and on its darkest policies. in december of